On 6 October 2010 14:16, Henning Thielemann <lemm...@henning-thielemann.de> wrote: > I'm generally not glad that some people rearrange existing structure and > expect that all of the affected authors follow. It's already tedious to > catch up with the yearly changes in GHC's package and other base packages > (e.g. transformers recently), and annoying when people propose to mark > packages as "inactive" or "unmaintained" in Hackage whenever the package > authors did not update their packages so far (and certainly lose > compatibility to older 'base' versions this way). > I would be glad if there is no further action to be taken for package > authors, who added their packages somewhen in the past and don't see a > reason to regularly check whether their packages are still listed in the > Wiki, without being marked "inactive" or so. If you think the re-structuring > is necessary, then at least ask the maintainers, whether they still maintain > their packages, or just sort the packages according to the degree of > activity you assume, but stay away from categorizing the packages in > "active" and "inactive" based on speculation.
Okay, don't worry about it, I'll do it! _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe